• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Reply to: The Generic API

Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "The Generic API"

Collapse

  • doodab
    replied
    Originally posted by TheFaQQer View Post
    You mean an Entity-Attribute-Value database.

    Good theory, awful practise.
    Yeah, kind of, except it wasn't "sparse" data.

    To be fair to said database vendor they advised in the manuals that each item (an in-flight proccess in a workflow system) have a small number of attributes corresponding to process state and keys in a properly designed relational schema.

    Unfortunately the people who implemented the system at clientco didn't read the manual and every data item ended up as an atrribute of the associated process.

    You can guess how the performance scaled with a few million processes and subprocesses (which would duplicate the data items they required) each having several hundred associated pieces of data.

    Leave a comment:


  • TheFaQQer
    replied
    Originally posted by minestrone View Post
    Intelligent Finance used that when I was there. They ended up putting 15 millions lines of code round it.
    Yet another Oracle Consulting project of legends - kerching!

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by minestrone View Post
    Intelligent Finance used that when I was there.

    Leave a comment:


  • TheFaQQer
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    ******* MAKE ME STOP!!!

    Bring on the new moderator(s)!!

    Leave a comment:


  • minestrone
    replied
    Originally posted by TheFaQQer View Post
    You mean an Entity-Attribute-Value database.

    Good theory, awful practise.
    Intelligent Finance used that when I was there. They ended up putting 15 millions lines of code round it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mich the Tester
    replied
    Originally posted by DimPrawn View Post
    Actually, he was. Were you there?
    If it was in Wognum, NL, yes. What a f**king pile of tulipe.

    Metadata and operational data all crammed in the same tables, nobody that knew the data model (basically there wasn't one), and some twunt who said 'we don't use referential integrity in oracle because it makes the performance worse'. FFS, the whole point of a RDBMS is referential integrity, but would Bob call Oracle and check his assertions with them? Of course not.

    I didn't even get paid for half that contract because clientco AND agent went bust. The only good thing is that Bob didn't get paid either.
    Last edited by Mich the Tester; 11 March 2010, 10:48.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by DimPrawn View Post
    We don't pick you up on your Russian typo's so lay off our English ones.

    ******* MAKE ME STOP!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • DimPrawn
    replied
    Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
    Was he from infosys?
    Actually, he was. Were you there?

    Leave a comment:


  • DiscoStu
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post


    Practice
    Practise

    Practise - Verb

    Practice - Noun

    HTH

    Leave a comment:


  • Mich the Tester
    replied
    Originally posted by DimPrawn View Post
    I worked with a guy designing a corporate database.

    He had a plan that every table would have a many-to-many join table with every other, so the schema looked like a rats nest. He said this "future proofed" the database for any possible business changes.

    Smart cookie.

    Was he from infosys?

    Leave a comment:


  • DimPrawn
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post


    Practice
    We don't pick you up on your Russian typo's so lay off our English ones.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by TheFaQQer View Post
    Good theory, awful practise.


    Practice

    Leave a comment:


  • TheFaQQer
    replied
    Originally posted by doodab View Post
    I once worked with a piece of software that had two tables.

    items (item_id, item_name)

    attributes(attribute_id, item_id, attribute_name, attribute_value)

    The software in question was an offering from a well known database vendor.
    You mean an Entity-Attribute-Value database.

    Good theory, awful practise.

    Leave a comment:


  • doodab
    replied
    I once worked with a piece of software that had two tables.

    items (item_id, item_name)

    attributes(attribute_id, item_id, attribute_name, attribute_value)

    The software in question was an offering from a well known database vendor.

    Leave a comment:


  • DimPrawn
    replied
    I worked with a guy designing a corporate database.

    He had a plan that every table would have a many-to-many join table with every other, so the schema looked like a rats nest. He said this "future proofed" the database for any possible business changes.

    Smart cookie.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X